Skip to main content

About your Search

20130113
20130121
Search Results 0 to 7 of about 8 (some duplicates have been removed)
, 2013 will be the year that we accepted a nuclear iran or we went to war. for more on this, you can read my column in this week's "time" magazine. let's get started. >>> when president obama chose the conservative republican for the post of defense secretary, you might not have expected opposition from the right, but you would have been wrong. while many conservatives support hagel's nomination, there is spirited opposition from the right. perhaps the first public opposition to chuck hagel was a column in "wall street journal" by its foreign affairs columnist bret stephens. he leveled a charge against the former senator, one of the first full throated defenses of hagel came in the "daily beast" from the editor of that website's blog and the author of the "crisis of zionism." joining me now bret stephens and peter beinart. brett, let's start with you, you essentially accused chuck hagel of being an anti-semite. >> i said there was an odor of prejudice. >> what evidence do you have thats is the case? >> he had this famous statement that i'm sure you heard several times by now about the jew
east and continue to project american power. do you view it that way? >> the first obama administration was also not an administration saying let's go find some place to bomb. neither, for that matter, was president bush's eight years. we fought the wards that we felt were necessary. president bush worked hard to try to solve other problems through diplomatic means. and so i think it's a little too stark to make this kind of characterization. i, as you well know, always believed that we should try to avoid war. we should be willing to talk to friends and willing to talk to enemies. and try to find a solution that's peaceful. but when do you find it is necessary to use military force, use it with a clear political objective in mind and use it for a decisive result. that's the kind of attitude that chuck haiglogical bring to the equation. we will be careful. he will give the president his best advice on the use or non-use of military force, how to solve the problem diplomatically. i'm sure he will be a great companion with mr.er can any that regard. it's a good team. i think it's a very,
. the republican . -- the republican line. caller: mr. obama, they say it is not his fault. he has had for years. he said he would cut the deficit in half. they passed the deficit a year ago, about cutting this. why is it not being cut now? i have been told both sides are not getting along, but he is the president, and he needs to lead. i do not understand how there are billions of dollars across the world to different countries. i know we do that for specific reasons, but we should be using some of that money to pay our deficits off. what i do not understand is, why are we continuing to do that, to help everybody else out and we should be taking care of our own country? host: let me show you the front page of the new york times. if we can move over -- we will move it over, here it is right here, a wide shot -- will be focusing on senator hagel in a couple of minutes and looking back at some of the things he has said over his tenure in the u.s. senate. that line from "the new york times" -- also from "the hartford courant" -- "the arizona republic repor" -- some local stories, beginning with "th
to fix that. the one thing that the supreme court has done twice in five years is reaffirm an individual's right to own a gun. second amendment is alive and well. that is settled by the court. i imagine that the obama white house had their lawyers look carefully and some could be challenged. they probably will be able to pass muster and get flak for it. bad p.r. from some people. a lot of these things will be ineffective. >> bob: let's wait to see what they are. >> andrea: a lot of bad p.r. hard for anyone questioning what he does tomorrow to criticize. >> bob: there you go. >> andrea: how can you be against this? >> bob: another good reason. it's all theater. >> kimberly: children are politically expedient. this is based on his greater political philosophy. >> eric: ahead, could lance armstrong doping lies be the biggest sport scandal of all time? that debate plus news on the interview with oprah when we come back. ♪ ♪ ♪ ♪ >> dana: >> dana: nothing better than bob beckel chair dancing. we'll talk about lance armstrong who admitted to using performance enhancing drugs. he sat dow
Search Results 0 to 7 of about 8 (some duplicates have been removed)

Terms of Use (31 Dec 2014)